8.b2i KSD_SSTS DESIGN_12050 196th St, Scandia_10-22-20_Ver 1.310/22/2020
SSTS Design
12050 196th Street North
Scandia, MN 55073
PID # 29.032.20.14.0009
Version 1.3
Kloeppner Services & Designs, LLC
MPCA LICENSE # 4043
763.843.4114
CONNECT@KSD‐MN.COM
Prepared by KSD @ 2020 www.ksd‐mn.com Page | 1
SSTS Design Summary Report 10/22/20
On October 7th, 2020, a site evaluation was conducted at 12050 196th Streets North, Scandia, MN 55073 in
Washington County to identify a location for a replacement Subsurface Sewage Treatment System (SSTS).
The PID number is 29.032.20.14.0009. The replacement SSTS is a Type III Mound dispersal bed with a new
Sewage Tank and a Pump Tank.
Prior to submitting for permit from the local unit government or county, please review and sign all pages
which require a signature.
Wastewater Sources & Peak Flow Rate
The expected waste strength is Residential Wastewater with a Peak flow of 300 Gallons Per Day (GPD) for a
2‐bedroom house. The Actual Daily Flow should be less than 70% of the Peak Flow (210 GPD).
Sewage Tanks
The required Sewage Tanks for a two (2) bedroom home is 1,500‐gallons in two tanks or two
compartments. The designed Sewage Tank is 1,500‐gallons in a single tank with 500‐gallons and 1,000‐
gallons compartments. An additional Pump Tank will be used for a pump to pressurize the Mound
distribution network. The Pump Tank will also provide 600‐gallons of Reserve Storage for flows in excess of
150‐gallons/24‐hours above the High‐Level Water Alarm.
The existing septic tank and drainfield must be abandoned.
Type III Mound
The dispersal area will be a Type III Mound. The Mound Soil Absorption Area is design for 183‐sqft (8’ x
20.9’). The Mound Soil Absorption Area has been reduced to fit the Absorption Area on the available land
space and to avoid the need for Type II ‐ Holding Tanks.
The Mound Soil Absorption Area is designed to receive 70% of a Daily Average Flow of 220 GPD. The Daily
Flow will be set to only allow 150 GPD to enter the mound within a 24‐hour period. The size of the system
was designed to fit a 10’ x 25’ area for treatment and absorption.
Additionally, to reduce the overall width of the system, the design will include two specific design
adaptations for the construction of the mound.
1.Dig out the Fine Sand soil horizons to an elevation of 949.0’. Replace dugout soil with washed
mound sand.
2.Build a box mound for the mound sand and absorption area above the finished ground elevation to
reduce the width of the system.
The minimum required materials for the sewer line, distribution network, pumps, supply line, sand, rock, fill, and cover
are detailed in the design worksheets included with this design. Actual values may change slightly and will need to be
field verified for correctness.
Time Dose Control Panel
A time‐dosing control panel must be installed to operate all dosing pump cycles. The panel must include
the ability to record cycle events and set the cycle intervals to specified On and Off times.
Site Specific Notes
1. The location of the new mound and sewage tanks will not be able to meet setbacks from
property line (10'). Approval from the City of Scandia is required prior to submittal to
Washington County to receive a permit.
Prepared by KSD @ 2020 www.ksd‐mn.com Page | 2
2.The soil under the Soil Absorption Area (8' wide x 22.9') long will be dugout and replaced with
washed mound sand to the depth of the Medium Sand horizon. See Site Plan for details.
3.Trees will need to be removed.
4.Property examined for Type I. No suitable soil or available space found.
5.Sewage Tanks must be > 75’ from OHW.
Construction Notes
Building Permit requirements.
No construction shall be allowed by any local unit of government until the permit required for the
subsurface sewage treatment system has been issued.
Site Protection.
Prior to and during construction or lot improvements, the proposed initial and replacement soil treatment
and dispersal areas shall be protected from disturbance, compaction, or other damage by use of stakes and
silt fence or snow fence.
MR 7080.2100, Subpart 1. F
Electrical installations must comply with applicable laws and ordinances including the most current codes,
rules, and regulations of public authorities having jurisdiction and with part 1315.0200, which incorporates
the National Electrical Code.
As‐Built Drawing
The Licensed Installer must provide an As‐Built of the final location of all components. The attached Site
Plan is only for reference and should not be considered as final survey or location of system components.
Protection from Freezing for Supply Line
The Mound supply line must drain back and empty pipe after each dose. To avoid potential freezing,
additional depth or insulation may be necessary to keep line from freezing if buried too shallow.
Soil Erosion & Protection from Freezing
The dispersal area must have seed and grass established throughout the excavated areas to maintain
proper protection from soil erosion and freezing.
12050 196th st N, Scandia, MN
0 20 4010 ft
0 7 143.5 m
1:2 50
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification. 3'-0"50' from Deep Well
5'-4"
1
,
0
0
0
-
g
a
l
1
,
5
0
0
-
g
a
l
Spike Nailed in Power Pole
BM=949.9'
Proposed Location of Tanks
**Installer may choose a different location**
HOUSE
Kloeppner Services & Designs, LLC
Lic # 4043
Approved by: Jesse Kloeppner
Date - 10/22/20
LEGEND:
W = Well
SB = Soil Boring
SP = Soil Pit
= Benchmark NORTH
NOTES:
1. New Tanks: 1,500-gal Two-Compartment; 1,000-gal Pump Tank.
2. The Design Flow for the Soil Treatment area was reduced from 300 gallons per day (GPD) to 220 GPD
to fit landspace available.
3. The location of the new mound and sewage tanks will not be able to meet all setbacks from property line
(10'). Approval from the City of Scandia is required prior to submittal to Washington County to receive a
permit.
4. The soil under the Soil Absorption Area (8' wide x 22.9') long will be dugout and replaced with washed
mound sand to the depth of the Medium Sand horizon. See Site Plan for details.
5. Trees will need to be removed.
6. The new septic system will be placed on newly acquired ground, not over the existing system.
- THIS IS ONLY A SITE PLAN
- ALL SEPTIC LOCATIONS AND MEASUREMENTS ARE ONLY ESTIMATES
- AS-BUILT WILL NEED TO BE PROVIDED BY INSTALLER AFTER CONSTRUCTION
MOUND DIMENSIONS
Rockbed - 8' x 22.9'
Absorption Bed - 10' x 24.9'
Total Mound - 10' x 24.9'
Digout Soil to Medium Sand Horizon
Upslope Elev. - 949.0'
Min: Sand Height - 36" @ 952.0'
Rockbed Laterals Elev. - 952.8'
Height @ Crown Elev. - 954.3'
LATERALS
3 - Laterals @ 20.9' of 1-1/2" SCH40
Spacing - 3' - Drilled Holes - 3/16"
NW - 951.2' SB1 - 952.1'
NE - 952.3' SB2 - 952.1'
SW - 951.0' SB3 - 951.1'
SE - 952.2' SP1 - 951.2'
CONSTRUCTION & PUMPER ACCESS
SB1
SP1
SB3
SB2
5% slope
12' - 2" SCH40 PIPE
INV
946.3'
Ground Elev.
950.8
Digout Fine Sand to Medium Sand
Horizon at Elevation of 949.0'
Install Effluent
Screen at Outlet
Approx. Invert
Outlet - 948.0'41' - 4" SCH40 PIPEGARAGE10'-6"7'-1"4% slope
Abandon Existing
Drainfield & Tanks
2'
-
0
"10'-1"9'-3"8'-2"
2
6
'
-
0
"22'-0"2
8
'
-
0
"3'-0"3'
-
0
"
DISPERSAL BE
D
ABSORPTIO
N
A
R
E
A
ABSORPTION A
R
E
A
25'-0"10'-0"
1
0
'
-
0
"
1
3
'
-
0
"
5'-4"
INV.
945.9'6'-8"75' from OHW7
5
'
-
0
"
Ordinary
High
Water
(OHW)Ordinary High Water(OHW)942.2'
1'
-
0
"
INV.
945.9'
Preliminary
Evaluation Worksheet
1. Contact Information v 04.01.2020
Property Owner/Client:
Site Address:
Legal Description:
Parcel ID: SEC: TWP: RNG:
A. Client-Provided Information
Project Type:
Project Use:
Residential use:# Bedrooms: Dwelling Sq.ft.: Unfinished Sq. Ft.:
# Adults: # Children: # Teenagers:
In-home business (Y/N): If yes, describe:
* Clear water source - should not go into system
Additional current or future uses:
Anticipated non-domestic waste:
The above is complete & accurate:
B. Designer-determined flow Information Attach additional information as necessary.
Design Flow: GPD Anticipated Waste Type:
BOD: mg/L TSS mg/L Oil & Grease mg/L
3. Preliminary Site Information
A. Water Supply Wells
1
2
3
4
Client signature & date
300
<25<60<170
Confining
Layer
STA
Setback
50'
Source
MN Well Index
Residential
2
Project ID:
32 2029
Robert & Debra Davies Date Completed:
No
Water-using devices:
(check all that apply)
9/14/2020
2. Flow and General System Information
29.032.20.14.0009
12050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073
THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 32, RANGE 20, WASHINGTON
COUNTY, MINNESOTA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER
OF LOT 9, BLOCK 2, OF THE RECORDED PLAT OF BECKSTROM ADDITION; THENCE SOUTH 36
DEGREES 17 MINUTES WEST ASSUMING THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF SAID LOT
#DescriptionMn. ID#
Well Depth
(ft.)
Casing
Depth (ft.)
12070 196th St 107146 170
Additional Well Information:
147
New Construction Replacement
Residential Other Establishment:
Garbage Disposal/Grinder
Large Bathtub >40 gallons Self-Cleaning Humidifier*
Water Softener*Sump Pump*
High Eff. Furnace*
Hot Tub*
Iron Filter*
Repair
Clothes Washing Machine
Sewage pump in basement
Other:
Dishwasher
Expansion
Preliminary
Evaluation Worksheet
Site within 200' of noncommunity transient well (Y/N) Yes, source:
Site within a drinking water supply management area (Y/N) Yes, source:
Site in Well Head Protection inner wellhead management zone (Y/N) Yes, source:
Buried water supply pipes within 50 ft of proposed system (Y/N)
B. Site located in a shoreland district/area?Yes, name:
Elevation of ordinary high water level: ft Source:
Classification: Tank Setback: ft. STA Setbk: ft.
C. Site located in a floodplain?Yes, Type(s):
Floodplain designation/elevation (10 Year): ft Source:
Floodplain designation/elevation (100 Year): ft Source:
D. Property Line Id / Source:
E. ID distance of relevant setbacks on map:
Map Units: Slope Range: %
List landforms:
Landform position(s):
Parent materials:
Depth to Bedrock/Restrictive Feature: in Depth to Watertable: in
Septic Tank Absorption Field- At-grade:
Septic Tank Absorption Field- Mound:
Septic Tank Absorption Field- Trench:
Name of LGU:
LGU Contact:
LGU-specific setbacks:
LGU-specific design requirements:
LGU-specific installation requirements:
Notes:
3-9159B; Anoka loamy fine sand
No
4. Preliminary Soil Profile Information From Web Soil Survey (attach map & description)
No N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
No
No
No
No
5. Local Government Unit Information
75' from Recreational Development Lakes
Septic Tanks: 1-bedroom = 3,000-gal
>80
outwash plains
backslope
outwash
Moderately Limited
Moderately Limited
Map Unit
Ratings
Washington County
Public Health & Environment - 651-430-6655
>80
Not Limited
Survey Plat Map
Property Lines Other:OHWL
EasementsWater Well(s)
Building(s)
Owner County GIS Other
Field
Evaluation Worksheet
1. Project Information
Site Address:
Utility Locations Identified
Locate and Verify (see Site Evaluation map )
Landscape position:
Percent slope: % Slope shape: Slope direction:
Describe the flooding or run-on potential of site:
Describe the need for Type III or Type IV system:
Note:
Proposed soil treatment area protected? (Y/N): If yes, describe:
If yes, describe:
Soil observations were conducted in the proposed system location (Y/N):
A soil observation in the most limiting area of the proposed system (Y/N):
Number of soil observations: Soil observation logs attached (Y/N):
Percolation tests performed & attached (Y/N):
in ft *Most Restrictive Depth Identified from List Below
Periodically saturated soil: in ft Soil Texture:
Standing water: in ft Percolation Rate: min/inch
Bedrock: in ft Soil Hyd Loading Rate:gpd/ft2
Benchmark Elevation: ft Elevations and Benchmark on map? (Y/N):
Benchmark Elevation Location:
Differences between soil survey and field evaluation:
Site evaluation issues / comments:
Anticipated construction issues:The mound and tanks will not be able to meet all setbacks for property line and buildings.
Trees will need to be removed. The mound absorption area will be dug out to add mound
sand.
Stakes
Filled, Compacted, Disturbed areas (Y/N):
4. General Soils Information
Top of Spike on Power Pole (See Map)
1.2
100.0 Yes
26 949.0
Project ID:
Vegetation type(s): Lawn Shoulder
Linear, Linear
2. Utility and Structure Information
3. Site Information
5
Reduced STA to fit available space.
medium sand
Yes
4
No
Yes
5. Phase I. Reporting Information
Elevation
949.0
Depth
26
Limiting Condition*:
v 04.01.2020
No
Yes
northwest
Yes
Date Completed: 10/7/202012050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073
Property Owner/Client:Robert & Debra Davies
Gopher State One Call #Any Private Utilities:
Existing Buildings Improvements Easements Setbacks
Project ID:Client:Soil parent material(s): (Check all that apply)Landscape Position: (select one) Slope %: 4.0 Slope shape 954.1Vegetation:948.3DateShape Grade10YR 4/310YR 4/310YR 4/410YR 5/410YR 7/1 2.5Y 5/8 Concentrations S110YR 8/1 Depletions S2CommentsI hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws.L4043(License #)Soil Observation Log v 04.01.2020Robert & Debra DaviesLocation / Address: 12050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073Shoulder Linear, LinearElevation-relative to benchmark:Lawn Soil survey map units: 159B; Anoka loamy fine sand Limiting Layer Elevation:Weather Conditions/Time of Day: Sunny 3:30 PM 10/07/20Observation #/Location:SB1 See Map Observation Type: AugerIndicator(s)I-------- Structure-----------IConsistence0-10Very Fine Sand0%Single grain Structureless LooseDepth (in) TextureRock Frag. %Matrix Color(s) Mottle Color(s) Redox Kind(s)Loose10-28 Fine Sand 0%Single grain Structureless Loose28-36 Sand 0%Single grain StructurelessFirm36-46 Sand 5%Single grain Structureless Loose46-55Sandy Clay Loam5%Blocky ModerateLimiting Layer = 46"Jesse Kloeppner10/7/2020(Designer/Inspector) (Signature) (Date)OutwashLacustrineLoessTillAlluviumBedrockOrganic Matter
Project ID:Client:Soil parent material(s): (Check all that apply)Landscape Position: (select one) Slope %: 4.0 Slope shape 952.1Vegetation:949.0DateShape Grade10YR 4/210YR 4/410YR 5/410YR 7/2 10YR 5/8 Concentrations S12.5Y 8/1 Depletions S2CommentsI hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws.L4043(License #)Limiting Layer = 37"Jesse Kloeppner10/7/2020(Designer/Inspector) (Signature) (Date)Loose37-48 Sand 0%Single grain StructurelessLoose26-37 Sand 0%Single grain Structureless Loose10-26 Fine Sand 0%Single grain StructurelessRedox Kind(s) Indicator(s)I-------- Structure-----------IConsistence0-10Loamy Fine Sand0%Single grain Structureless LooseDepth (in) TextureRock Frag. %Matrix Color(s) Mottle Color(s)Weather Conditions/Time of Day: Sunny 3:15 PM 10/07/20Observation #/Location:SB2 See Map Observation Type: AugerShoulder Linear, LinearElevation-relative to benchmark:Lawn Soil survey map units: 159B; Anoka loamy fine sand Limiting Layer Elevation:Soil Observation Log v 04.01.2020Robert & Debra DaviesLocation / Address: 12050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073OutwashLacustrineLoessTillAlluviumBedrockOrganic Matter
Project ID:Client:Soil parent material(s): (Check all that apply)Landscape Position: (select one) Slope %: 4.0 Slope shape 951.1Vegetation:949.0DateShape Grade10YR 4/310YR 4/410YR 6/2 2.5Y 5/8 Concentrations S110YR 8/2 Depletions S110YR 7/2 2.5Y 5/8 Concentrations S2CommentsI hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws.L4043(License #)Soil Observation Log v 04.01.2020Robert & Debra DaviesLocation / Address: 12050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073Shoulder Linear, LinearElevation-relative to benchmark:Lawn Soil survey map units: 159B; Anoka loamy fine sand Limiting Layer Elevation:Weather Conditions/Time of Day: Sunny 3:40 PM 10/07/20Observation #/Location:SB3 See Map Observation Type: AugerIndicator(s)I-------- Structure-----------IConsistence0-12Loamy Fine Sand0%Single grain Structureless LooseDepth (in) TextureRock Frag. %Matrix Color(s) Mottle Color(s) Redox Kind(s)Loose12-26 Fine Sand 0%Single grain Structureless Loose26-30 Sand 0%Single grain Structureless30-40 Sand 5%Single grain Structureless LooseLimiting Layer = 26"Jesse Kloeppner10/7/2020(Designer/Inspector) (Signature) (Date)OutwashLacustrineLoessTillAlluviumBedrockOrganic Matter
Project ID:Client:Soil parent material(s): (Check all that apply)Landscape Position: (select one) Slope %: 4.0 Slope shape 951.2Vegetation:949.0DateShape Grade10YR 4/310YR 4/410YR 5/42.5Y 7/2 2.5Y 5/8 Concentrations S110YR 8/1 Depletions S2CommentsI hereby certify that I have completed this work in accordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws.L4043(License #)Limiting Layer = 27"Jesse Kloeppner10/7/2020(Designer/Inspector) (Signature) (Date)Loose30-40 Sand 5%Single grain StructurelessLoose24-27 Sand 5%Single grain Structureless Loose12-24 Fine Sand 0%Single grain StructurelessRedox Kind(s) Indicator(s)I-------- Structure-----------IConsistence0-12Loamy Fine Sand0%Single grain Structureless LooseDepth (in) TextureRock Frag. %Matrix Color(s) Mottle Color(s)Weather Conditions/Time of Day: Sunny 3:50 PM 10/07/20Observation #/Location:SP1 See Map Observation Type: PitShoulder Linear, LinearElevation-relative to benchmark:Lawn Soil survey map units: 159B; Anoka loamy fine sand Limiting Layer Elevation:Soil Observation Log v 04.01.2020 Location / Address: 12050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073OutwashLacustrineLoessTillAlluviumBedrockOrganic Matter
Textures:CClayCoSiC Silty ClayMSC Sandy ClayFCL Clay LoamVFSiCL Silty Clay LoamSCL Sandy Clay LoamSi SiltSiL Silt LoamSubsoil Indicator(s) of Saturation:LLoamS1. Distinct gray or red redox featuresSL Sandy Loam*S2. Depleted matrix (value >/=4 and chroma </=2)LS Loamy Sand*S3. 5Y chroma </= 3SSand*S4. 7.5 YR or redder faint redox concentrations or redox depletionsShape:Slope Shape:Grade:Poorly formed, indistinct peds, barely observable in placeNo observable aggregates, or no orderly arrangement of natural lines of weaknessConsistence:Fine T3. Organic texture or organic modifiersVery Fine*Sand Modifiers: Topsoil Indicator(s) of Saturation:Coarse T1. Wetland VegetationMedium T2. Depressional LandscapeT4. N 2.5/ 0 colorT5. Redox features in topsoilGranularThe peds are approximately spherical or polyhedral and are commonly found in topsoil. These are the small, rounded peds that hang onto roots when soil is turned over.BlockyThe peds are block-like or polyhedral, and are bounded by flat or slightly rounded surface that are castings of the faces of surrounding peds. Blocky structure is commonly found in the lower topsoil and subsoil.PlatyThe peds are flat and plate like. They are oriented horizontally and are usually overlapping. Platy structure is commonly found in forested areas just below the leaf litter or shallow topsoil.T6. Hydraulic indicatorsWeakModerateWell formed, distinct peds, moderately durable and evident, but not distinct in undisturbed soilLooseNo peds, sandy soilSlope shape is described in two directions: up and down slope (perpendicular to the contour), and across slope (along the horizontal contour); e.g. Linear, Convex or LV'. Single GrainThe structure found in a sandy soil. The individual particles are not held together.PrismaticFlat or slightly rounded vertical faces bound the individual peds. Peds are distinctly longer vertically, and faces are typically casts or molds of adjoining peds. Prismatic structure is commonly found in the lower subsoil.RigidFoot pressureStrongDurable peds that are quite evident in un-displaced soil, adhere weakly to one another, withstand displacement, and become separated when soil is disturbedMassiveLooseIntact specimen not availableFirmModerate force between fingersFriableSlight force between fingersExtremely FirmModerate force between hands or slight foot pressure
Design Summary Page
1. PROJECT INFORMATION v 04.01.2020
Property Owner/Client: Project ID:
Site Address: Date:
2. DESIGN FLOW & WASTE STRENGTH
Attach data / estimate basis for Other Establishments
Design Flow: GPD Anticipated Waste Type:
BOD: mg/L TSS: mg/L Oil & Grease: mg/L
Treatment Level: Select Treatment Level C for residential septic tank effluent
3. HOLDING TANK SIZING
Minimum Capacity: Residential =400 gal/bedroom, Other Establishment = Design Flow x 5.0, Minimum size 1000 gallons
Code Minimum Holding Tank Capacity: Gallons in Tanks or Compartments
Recommended Holding Tank Capacity: Gallons in Tanks or Compartments
Type of High Level Alarm: (Set @ 75% tank capacity)
Comments:
4. SEPTIC TANK SIZING
A. Residential dwellings:
Number of Bedrooms (Residential):
Code Minimum Septic Tank Capacity: Gallons in Tanks or Compartments
Recommended Septic Tank Capacity: Gallons in Tanks or Compartments
Effluent Screen & Alarm (Y/N): Model/Type:
B. Other Establishments:
Waste received by: Days Hyd. Retention Time
Code Minimum Septic Tank Capacity: Gallons In Tanks or Compartments
Recommended Septic Tank Capacity: Gallons In Tanks or Compartments
Effluent Screen & Alarm (Y/N): Model/Type:
5. PUMP TANK SIZING
Pump Tank 1 Capacity (Minimum): Gal Pump Tank 2 Capacity (Minimum): Gal
Pump Tank 1 Capacity (Recommended): Gal Pump Tank 2 Capacity (Recommended): Gal
Pump 1 GPM Total Head ft Pump 2 GPM Total Head ft
Supply Pipe Dia. 2.00 in Dose Vol: gal Dose Vol: Gal
10/13/2012050 196th St N, Scandia, MN 55073
1500 2
Robert & Debra Davies
2
1500
1000
9.0
Supply Pipe Dia.
300 Residential
<170
13.1
<60 <25
C
GPD x
500
2
Yes PolyLok 525
50.0
Design Summary Page
6. SYSTEM AND DISTRIBUTION TYPE
Soil Treatment Type: Distribution Type:
Elevation Benchmark: ft Benchmark Location:
MPCA System Type: Distribution Media:
Type III/IV Details:
7. SITE EVALUATION SUMMARY:
Describe Limiting Condition:
Layers with >35% Rock Fragments? (yes/no) No
Note:
Depth Elevation of Limiting Condition
Limiting Condition: inches 2.2 ft ft
Minimum Req'd Separation: inches 3.0 ft Critical for system compliance
Code Max System Depth: inches -0.8 ft ft
This is the maximimum depth to the bottom of the distribution media for required separation. Negative Depth (ft) means it must be a mound.
Soil Texture:
Soil Hyd. Loading Rate:GPD/ft2 Percolation Rate: MPI
Contour Loading Rate: Note:
Measured Land Slope: % Note:
Comments:
8.
Trench:
Dispersal Area ft2 Sidewall Depth in Trench Width ft
Total Lineal Feet ft No. of Trenches Code Max. Trench Depth in
Contour Loading Rate ft Length ft Designed Trench Depth in
Bed:
Dispersal Area ft2 Sidewall Depth in Maximum Bed Depth in
Bed Width ft Bed Length ft Designed Bed Depth in
Mound:
Dispersal Area ft2 Bed Length ft Bed Width ft
Absorption Width ft Clean Sand Lift ft Berm Width (0-1%) ft
Upslope Berm Width ft Downslope Berm ft Endslope Berm Width ft
Total System Length ft System Width ft Contour Loading Rate
gal/ft9.6
1.0
10.0
1.0
8.0
5.0
Type III
183.3 22.9
8.0
0.0
24.9
1.20
SOIL TREATMENT AREA DESIGN SUMMARY
Depth
26 949.00
Pressure Distribution-Level
Top of Spike on Power Pole (See M
Project ID:
If yes, describe below: % rock and layer thickness, amount of
soil credit and any additional information for addressing the rock fragments in this design.
Mound sized reduced to fit available space.
100
1.0
Redoximorphic Features/Saturated Soils
36
Mound 952.00
10
Mound
Rock
medium sand
Elevation
Design Summary Page
At-Grade:
Bed Width ft Bed Length ft Finished Height ft
Contour Loading Rate gal/ft Upslope Berm ft Downslope Berm ft
Endslope Berm ft System Length ft System Width ft
Level & Equal Pressure Distribution
No. of Laterals Perforation Spacing ft Perforation Diameter in
Lateral Diameter in Min Dose Volume gal Max Dose Volume gal
9.
A.Starting BOD Concentration = Design Flow X Starting BOD (mg/L) X 8.35 ÷ 1,000,000
= lbs. BOD/day
B.Target BOD Concentration = Design Flow X Target BOD (mg/L) X 8.35 ÷ 1,000,000
= lbs. BOD/day
Lbs. BOD To Be Removed:
PreTreatment Technology: *Must Meet or Exceed Target
Disinfection Technology: *Required for Levels A & B
C.Organic Loading to Soil Treatment Area:
mg/L X gpd x 8.35 ÷ 1,000,000 ÷ ft2 =lbs./day/ft2
10. Comments/Special Design Considerations:
I hereby certify that I have completed this work in a ccordance with all applicable ordinances, rules and laws.
Project ID:
(Date)(Designer) (Signature)
Jesse Kloeppner L4043 10/13/20
gpd X mg/L X 8.35 ÷ 1,000,00
(License #)
1. New Tanks: 1,500-gal Two-Compartment; 1,000-gal Pump Tank.
2. The Design Flow for the Soil Treatment area was reduced from 300 gallons per day (GPD) to 220 GPD to fit
landspace available.
3. The location of the new mound and sewage tanks will not be able to meet all setbacks from property line (10')
and new buildings. Approval from the City of Scandia is required prior to submittal to Washington County to receive
a permit.
4. The soil under the Soil Absorption Area (8' wide x 22.9') long will be dugout and replaced with washed mound
sand to the depth of the Medium Sand horizon. See Site Plan for details.
5. Trees will need to be removed.
gpd X mg/L X 8.35 ÷ 1,000,00
Additional Info for At-Risk, HSW or Type IV Design
3 3/16
75281.50
3
1. SYSTEM SIZING:
A. Design Flow :GPD
B.Soil Loading Rate:GPD/ft2
C.Depth to Limiting Condition: ft
D.Percent Land Slope: %
E.Design Media Loading Rate:GPD/ft2
F.Mound Absorption Ratio:
2. DISPERSAL MEDIA SIZING
A.Calculate Dispersal Bed Area: Design Flow (1.A) ÷ Design Media Loading Rate
GPD/ft2 =ft2
ft2
B.Enter Dispersal Bed Width: ft Can not exceed 10 feet.
C.Calculate Contour Loading Rate: Bed Width X Design Media Loading Rate
ft2 X GPD/ft
2 =gal/ft Can not exceed Table 1
D.Calculate Minimum Dispersal Bed Length: Dispersal Bed Area ÷ Bed Width
ft2 ÷ ft = ft
3. ABSORPTION AREA SIZING
A.Calculate Absorption Width: Bed Width X Mound Absorption Ratio
ft X = ft
B.For slopes from 0 to 1%, the Absorption Width is measured from the bed equally in both directions.
Absorption Width Beyond the Bed: Absorption Width - Bed Width ÷ 2
( ft - ft) ÷ 2 =ft
Mound Design Worksheet
<1% Slope
220
1.2
1.2
1.00
Project ID:
GPD ÷
220
1.20
2.2
0.0
*Systems with these values are not Type I systems.
Contour Loading Rate (linear loading rate) is a
recommended value.
183
v 04.01.2020
8.0
If a larger dispersal media area is desired, enter size:
8
8 22.9183
8.0
81.2 9.6
8.0
8.0 1.0
0.0
4. DISTRIBUTION MEDIA: ROCK
A.
in ft
5. DISTRIBUTION MEDIA: REGISTERED TREATMENT PRODUCTS: CHAMBERS AND EZFLOW
A.Enter Dispersal Media:
B.Enter the Component: Length: ft Width: ft Depth: ft
C.Number of Components per Row = Bed Length divided by Component Length (Round up)
ft ÷ ft = components/row
D.Actual Bed Length = Number of Components/row X Component Length:
components X
E.Number of Rows = Bed Width divided by Component Width
ft ÷ ft = rows Adjust width so this is a whole number.
F.Total Number of Components = Number of Components per Row X Number of Rows
X=components
6. MOUND SIZING
A.Calculate Clean Sand Lift: 3 feet minus Depth to Limiting Condition = Clean Sand Lift (1 ft minimum)
3.0 ft - ft = ft Design Sand Lift (optional): ft
B.Upslope Height = Clean Sand Lift + Depth of Media + Depth to Cover Pipe + Depth of Cover (1 ft)
ft + ft + ft + ft =
ft
C.Berm Width = Upslope Mound Height X 4 (4 is recommended, but could be 3-12)
ft X ft =
ft
D.Total Landscape Width = Berm Width + Dispersal Bed Width + Berm Width
ft + ft + ft =
ft
E.Additional Berm Width necessary for absorption - Absorption Width - Total Landscape Width
ft - ft =
ft if number is negative (<0), value is ZERO
F.Final Berm Width = Additional Berm Width + Berm Width
ft + ft =
ft
G.Total Mound Width = Final Berm Width + Dispersal Bed Width + Final Berm Width
ft + ft + ft =
ft
H.Total Mound Length = Final Berm Width + Dispersal Bed Length + Final Berm Width
ft + ft + ft =
ft
I.Setbacks from the Bed: Absorption Width - Dispersal Bed Width divided by 2
(ft -) /2=ft
2.2
8.0 8.0
10.01.0
1.0
1.022.91.0
10.0
0
1.0
0
1.0
1.01.00
1.0
8.0
24.9
1.0 1.0
1.01.0
10.0
0.001.0 0.3
8.0
8.0
1.0
ft =
Check registered product
information for specific
application and design
Rock Depth Below Distribution Pipe
Project ID:
7. MOUND DIMENSIONS
Comments:
1. See attached Mound Design Worksheet - Box Mound for additional details.
2. The Design Flow was changed from 300 gallons per day (GPD) to 220 GPD to fit landspace available.
3. The soil under the 8' wide x 22.9' long Soil Absorption Area will be dugout and replaced with washed
mound sand to Medium Sand horizon.
4. The attached Mound Materials Worksheet may not be accurate. Top soil may not be used to cover top of
mound.
Project ID:
Upslope
Downslope
EndslopeEndslope Total Mound Width Total Mound Length
Absorption Width
Depth to Limiting Limiting Condition
Upslope berm Downslope berm
Clean sand lift (6.A)
18" cover on top
4" inspection pipe
Dispersal Bed
X 22.98
v 04.01.2020
A.Rock Volume : (Rock Below Pipe + Rock to cover pipe (pipe outside dia + ~2 inch)) X Bed Length X Bed Width = Volume
(in + 3.0 ft X ft =ft3
Divide ft3 by 27 ft3/yd3 to calculate cubic yards: ft
3 ÷ 27 =yd3
Add 30% for constructability: yd3 X 1.3 =yd3
B.Calculate Clean Sand Volume:
Volume Under Rock bed : Average Sand Depth x Media Width x Media Length = cubic feet
ft X ft X ft =ft3
For a Mound on a slope from 0-1%
Volume from Length = ((Upslope Mound Height - 1) X Absorption Width Beyond Bed X Media Bed Length)
ft - 1)X Xft=
Volume from Width = ((Upslope Mound Height - 1) X Absorption Width Beyond Bed X Media Bed Width)
ft - 1)X Xft=
Total Clean Sand Volume : Volume from Length + Volume from Width + Volume Under Media
ft3 + ft
3 + ft
3 = ft
3
For a Mound on a slope greater than 1%
Upslope Volume : ((Upslope Mound Height - 1 ) x 3 x Bed Length ) ÷ 2 = cubic feet
(( ft - 1) X ) ÷ 2 =ft3
Downslope Volume : ((Downslope Height - 1) x Downslope Absorption Width x Media Length ) ÷ 2 = cubic feet
(( ft - 1) X ft X ) ÷ 2 =ft3
Endslope Volume : (Downslope Mound Height - 1) x 3 x Media Width = cubic feet
( ft - 1 ) X ft =ft3
Total Clean Sand Volume : Upslope Volume + Downslope Volume + Endslope Volume + Volume Under Media
ft3 + ft
3 + ft
3 + ft
3 =ft3
Divide ft3 by 27 ft3/yd3 to calculate cubic yards: ft
3 ÷ 27 =yd3
Add 30% for constructability: yd3 X 1.3 =yd3
C.Calculate Sandy Berm Volume:
Total Berm Volume (approx): ((Avg. Mound Height - 0.5 ft topsoil) x Mound Width x Mound Length) ÷ 2
(-)ft X ft X ) ÷ 2 =ft3
Total Mound Volume - Clean Sand volume -Rock Volume = cubic feet
ft3 - ft
3 - ft
3 = ft
3
Divide ft3 by 27 ft3/yd3 to calculate cubic yards: ft
3 ÷ 27 =yd3
Add 30% for constructability: yd3 x 1.3 =yd3
D.Calculate Topsoil Material Volume: Total Mound Width X Total Mound Length X .5 ft
ft X ft X 0.5 ft =ft3
Divide ft3 by 27 ft3/yd3 to calculate cubic yards: ft
3 ÷ 27 =yd3
Add 30% for constructability: yd3 x 1.3 =yd34.6 6.0
9.4
86.00
45.8 -178.9
195.3183.3333333
124.6 4.6
62.3
10.0 24.9 124.6
2.2
6.00
195.3 7.2
7.2
62.3 195.3
24.9
45.8
45.8 1.7
1.0 8.0
1.7
8.022.9
22.9 183.3
in ) ÷ 12 X
-178.9 -6.6
-6.6 -8.6
1.0 0.5 10.0
3.0 ft X
Mound Materials Worksheet
6.06.0
1.00
3.0 ft X
1.00
22.91666667
Project ID:
v 04.01.2020
1. Media Bed Width:ft
2. Minimum Number of Laterals in system/zone = Rounded up number of [(Media Bed Width - 4) ÷ 3] + 1.
[(laterals
3. Designer Selected Number of Laterals :laterals
Cannot be less than line 2 (Except in at-grades)
4. Select Perforation Spacing :ft
5. Select Perforation Diameter Size:in 0.1875
6.Length of Laterals = Media Bed Length - 2 Feet.
-2ft= ft Perforation can not be closer then 1 foot from edge.
7.
Number of Perforation Spaces = ft ÷ ft = Spaces
8.
Spaces + 1 =Perfs. Per Lateral
3- 4 ) ÷ 3] + 1 =
Determine the Number of Perforation Spaces . Divide the Length of Laterals by the Perforation Spacing and
round down to the nearest whole number.
67
63.020.9
Number of Perforations per Lateral is equal to 1.0 plus the Number of Perforation Spaces . Check table below to
verify the number of perforations per lateral guarantees less than a 10% discharge variation. The value is double
with a center manifold.
Pressure Distribution
Design Worksheet
10 Does not apply to at-grades
Perforations Per Lateral =
3.00
Project ID:
3
3/16
10
22.9 20.9
Pressure Distribution
Design Worksheet
9.
Perf. Per Lat. X Number of Perf. Lat. = Total Number of Perf.
10.ft
11. Select Type of Manifold Connection (End or Center):
12.Select Lateral Diameter (See Table):in
13.Calculate the Square Feet per Perforation.
Recommended value is 4-11 ft2 per perforation, Does not apply to At-Grades
a. Bed Area = Bed Width (ft) X Bed Length (ft)
ft X ft = 229 ft2
b.Square Foot per Perforation = Bed Area ÷ by the Total Number of Perfs
ft2 ÷ perf =ft2/perf
14. Select Minimum Average Head :ft
15. Select Perforation Discharge based on Table: GPM per Perf
16.
Perfs X GPM per Perforation = GPM
17.Volume of Liquid Per Foot of Distribution Piping (Table II): Gallons/ft
18.Volume of Distribution Piping =
X ft X gal/ft = Gallons
19. Minimum Delivered Volume = Volume of Distribution Piping X 4
Gallons
Comments/Special Design Considerations:
10
21
23
End
Spacing of laterals; Must be greater than 1 foot and no more than 3 feet: 3.0
7
Total Number of Perforations equals the Number of Perforations per Lateral multiplied by the Number of
Perforated Laterals.
3
Flow Rate = Total Number of Perfs X Perforation Discharge.
0.41
1.0
10.921
1.50
gals X 4 =
= [Number of Perforated Laterals X Length of Laterals X (Volume of
Liquid Per Foot of Distribution Piping]
6.9
3
27.6
21 0.110 6.9
0.110
229
21 0.41 9
1. PUMP CAPACITY v 04.01.2020
A.If pumping to gravity enter the gallon per minute of the pump: GPM (10 - 45 gpm)
B.GPM
C.Enter pump description:
A.ft
B.ft
C.
D.in
ft
E.
Friction Loss =
F.
ft X 1.25 = ft
G.
ft per 100ft X ft ÷ 100 = ft
H.Total Head requirement is the sum of the Elevation Difference + Distribution Head Loss, + Additional Head Loss + Supply Friction Loss
ft + ft + ft + ft = ft
GPM with at least feet of total head.
Basic Pump Selection Design Worksheet
If pumping to a pressurized distribution system:
2. HEAD REQUIREMENTS
Project ID:
Pumping to Gravity or Pressure Distribution:
9.0
2.0
20
between pump and point of discharge:
Distribution Head Loss: 5
Additional Head Loss: ft (due to special equipment, etc.)
Equalization/Time Dosing
Pressure
1. Supply Pipe Diameter:
2. Supply Pipe Length:
Elevation Difference 8
0.1
Friction Loss in Plastic Pipe per 100ft from Table I:
0.26 ft per 100ft of pipe
20 25.0
Calculate Supply Friction Loss by multiplying Friction Loss Per 100ft by the Equivalent Pipe Length and divide by 100.
Supply Friction Loss =
0.26 25.0
Comments:
8.0 5.0 13.10.1
Determine Equivalent Pipe Length from pump discharge to soil dispersal area
discharge point. Estimate by adding 25% to supply pipe length for fitting loss.
Supply Pipe Length X 1.25 = Equivalent Pipe Length
3. PUMP SELECTION
A pump must be selected to deliver at least 9.0 13.1
v 04.01.2020
1. A.Design Flow (Design Sum.1A):GPD B. Tank Use:
C. Percentge of Design Flow 50 % Gal Up to 75% design flow is normal for Design percentage
D. Min. required pump tank capacity: Gal E. Recommended capacity: Gal
2. A. Tank Manufacturer: B. Tank Model:
C. Capacity from manufacturer: Gallons
D. Gallons per inch: Gallons per inch
E. Liquid depth of tank from manufacturer: inches
3.
( in + 2 inches) X Gallons Per In = Gallons
4.
-Item 18 of the Pressure Distribution or Item 11 of Non-level Gallons (minimum dose) inches/dose
5. Calculate Maximum Pumpout Volume (25% of Design Flow)
Design Flow: GPD X 0.25 = Gallons (maximum dose) inches/dose
6.Gallons
7.Calculate Doses Per Day = Percentage Design Flow ÷ Delivered Volume
Doses
8. Calculate Drainback:
A.Diameter of Supply Pipe = inches
B. Length of Supply Pipe = feet
C.Volume of Liquid Per Lineal Foot of Pipe = Gallons/ft
D.Drainback = Length of Supply Pipe X Volume of Liquid Per Lineal Foot of Pipe
ft X gal/ft = Gallons
9.Total Dosing Volume = Delivered Volume plus Drainback
gal + gal = Gallons
10.Working Storage Volume = Tank Volume -Volume to Cover Pump - Reserve Capacity
gal - gal - =Gallons
11.Required Flow Rate :
A. From Pump Curve - Must verify after Install: GPM*
B. Calculated GPM = Change in Depth (in) x Gallons Per Inch / Time Interval in Minutes
min = GPM
12.Select Flow Rate from Line 11.A or 11.B: GPM*
3.4 53
0.170
50
25.0
Minnesota Precast 1000 Gallon Pump Tank
1000 Note: Design calculations are based on this specific tank.
Substituting a different tank model will change the pump
float or timer settings. Contact designer if changes are
necessary.
40.0
3.0
10
Select a pumpout volume that meets both Minimum and Maximum:
(Pump and block height + 2 inches) X Gallons Per Inch
Pump Tank Design Worksheet (Time Dose)
150
DETERMINE DOSING VOLUME
25.0 300
Minimum Delivered Volume = 4 X Volume of Distribution Piping:
28
300 75
50
1000 300 600 100
in X 25.0 gal/in ÷
40.0
40
DETERMINE TANK CAPACITY AND DIMENSIONS Project ID:
300
500
150
20 0.170 3.4
2
20
gpd ÷ 50
Volume to Cover Pump (The inlet of pump should be 4 in from the bottom of the tank & 2 in covering the pump recommended)
3.0
1.1
gal =
Dosing
1000
*Note: This value
must be adjusted
after installation
based on pump
calibration.
Pump Tank Design Worksheet (Time Dose)
NORMAL OPERATION TIMER SETTINGS*
13.Calculate TIMER ON setting*:
Total Dosing Volume ÷ GPM HR MIN SEC
gal ÷ Minutes ON*0 1.0 20
14.Calculated TIMER OFF setting*:
Minutes Per Day (1440)/Doses Per Day - Minutes On HR MIN SEC
3min=Minutes OFF* 7 58.0 40
OPTIONAL PEAK ENABLE DOSING* - Desingers option for peak flow operation
15.Peak Percentage of Design Flow %
16.Peak Pump Volume that meets both Minimum and Maximum Volume gal + gal
17. gal HR MIN SEC
18. gal ÷ 40 gpm = min ON 0 1.0 20
HR MIN SEC
19. 3 1.3 min On min Off 7 58.0 40
20.Pump Off Float - Measuring from bottom of tank:
Distance to set Pump Off Float=Gallons to Cover Pump / Gallons Per Inch:
gal ÷ Inches 600 Gal
16.0 in
21.Alarm Float - Measuring from bottom of tank (90% recommended):100 Gal
Distance to set Alarm Float = Tank Depth X % of Tank Depth (0.9 recommended)
Inches
12.0 in 300 Gal
22.Reserve Capacity in gallons = (Tank Depth - Alarm Depth) X GPI
( = gallons
Gal
Alarm Depth
40.0
300 25.0
478.71440 min ÷ 1.3
Reserve Capacity
Peak TIMER OFF:1440 min ÷
40.0 in + 16.0 in) X 600.025.0
in X % =
gal/in =
1640
Storage Capacity
Normal Dose
Volume
Pump Off
*Note: This value must be adjusted after installation based on pump calibration.
53 gpm = 1.3
53
3.450 DrainBack
50
Peak TIMER ON 1.353
Peak Dose Volume 53
doses/day -
FLOAT SETTINGS
478.7
12.0
doses/day -
40.0
BOX MOUND DETAILS
1. SYSTEM SIZING:
A.Design Flow : GPD
B.Soil Loading Rate:GPD/ft2
C.Depth to Limiting Condition: ft
D.Percent Land Slope: %
E.Design Media Loading Rate:GPD/ft2
F.Mound Absorption Ratio:
2. DISPERSAL MEDIA SIZING
A.Calculate Dispersal Bed Area: Design Flow (1.A) ÷ Design Media Loading Rate
GPD/ft2 =ft2
ft2
B.Enter Dispersal Bed Width: ft Can not exceed 10 feet.
C.Calculate Contour Loading Rate: Bed Width X Design Media Loading Rate
ft2 X GPD/ft
2 =gal/ft Can not exceed Table 1
D.Calculate Minimum Dispersal Bed Length: Dispersal Bed Area ÷ Bed Width
ft2 ÷ ft = ft
3. ABSORPTION AREA SIZING
A.Calculate Absorption Width: Bed Width X Mound Absorption Ratio
ft X = ft
B.For slopes from 0 to 1%, the Absorption Width is measured from the bed equally in both directions.
Absorption Width Beyond the Bed: Absorption Width - Bed Width ÷ 2
( ft - ft) ÷ 2 =ft
Mound Design Worksheet
Box Mound
220
1.2
1.2
1.00
Project ID:
GPD ÷
220
0.60
0.0
1.0
*Systems with these values are not Type I systems.
Contour Loading Rate (linear loading rate) is a
recommended value.
183
v 04.01.2020
8.0
If a larger dispersal media area is desired, enter size:
8
8 22.9183
8.0
81.2 9.6
8.0
8.0 1.0
0.0
4. DISTRIBUTION MEDIA: ROCK
A.
in ft
5. DISTRIBUTION MEDIA: REGISTERED TREATMENT PRODUCTS: CHAMBERS AND EZFLOW
A.Enter Dispersal Media:
B.Enter the Component: Length: ft Width: ft Depth: ft
C.Number of Components per Row = Bed Length divided by Component Length (Round up)
ft ÷ ft = components/row
D.Actual Bed Length = Number of Components/row X Component Length:
components X
E.Number of Rows = Bed Width divided by Component Width
ft ÷ ft = rows Adjust width so this is a whole number.
F.Total Number of Components = Number of Components per Row X Number of Rows
X=components
6. MOUND SIZING
A.Calculate Clean Sand Lift: 3 feet minus Depth to Limiting Condition = Clean Sand Lift (1 ft minimum)
3.0 ft - ft = ft Design Sand Lift (optional): ft
B.Upslope Height = Clean Sand Lift + Depth of Media + Depth to Cover Pipe + Depth of Cover (1 ft)
ft + ft + ft + ft =
ft
C.Berm Width = Upslope Mound Height X 4 (4 is recommended, but could be 3-12)
ft X ft =
ft
D.Total Landscape Width = Berm Width + Dispersal Bed Width + Berm Width
ft + ft + ft =
ft
E.Additional Berm Width necessary for absorption - Absorption Width - Total Landscape Width
ft - ft =
ft if number is negative (<0), value is ZERO
F.Final Berm Width = Additional Berm Width + Berm Width
ft + ft =
ft
G.Total Mound Width = Final Berm Width + Dispersal Bed Width + Final Berm Width
ft + ft + ft =
ft
H.Total Mound Length = Final Berm Width + Dispersal Bed Length + Final Berm Width
ft + ft + ft =
ft
I.Setbacks from the Bed: Absorption Width - Dispersal Bed Width divided by 2
(ft -) /2=ft
2.0
8.0 8.0
10.01.0
1.0
1.022.91.0
10.0
0
1.0
0
1.0
2.20.75
1.0
8.0
24.9
1.0 1.0
1.01.0
10.0
0.331.0 0.1
8.0
8.0
1.0
0.33
ft =
Check registered product
information for specific
application and design
4
Rock Depth Below Distribution Pipe
Project ID:
7. MOUND DIMENSIONS
Comments:
1. The Design Flow was changed from 300 gallons per day (GPD) to 220 GPD to fit landspace available.
2. The soil under the 8' wide x 22.9' long Soil Absorption Area will be dugout and replaced with washed
mound sand to Medium Sand horizon.
3. The attached Mound Materials Worksheet may not be accurate. Top soil may not be used to cover top of
mound.
Project ID:
Upslope
Downslope
EndslopeEndslope Total Mound Width Total Mound Length
Depth to Limiting Limiting Condition
Berm
Clean sand lift (6.A)
4" inspection pipe
Dispersal Bed
X 22.98
Berm
ALTERNATIVE DESIGN FOR MOUND SYSTEMS – VERTICAL SIDEWALL MOUNDS
M. S. Wespetal*
ABSTRACT
Mound systems are used to overcome limitations imposed by seasonally saturated soils or bedrock.
Mound systems are essentially a single pass, open bottom sand filter that provides both treatment
and disposal of sewage tank effluent. Mound systems have proven to adequately treat and dispose
of sewage in a reliable, cost-effective manner. However, mounds have been criticized, mainly by
the public, for the large footprint required, poor aesthetics and the unusable lawn area resulting from
the sharp rise in elevation. In addition, many existing sites with a seasonally saturated soil are too
small to support the large footprint required for mound systems. To overcome these problems an
alternative mound design is proposed that requires less footprint area and is more aesthetically
pleasing.
This vertical sidewall mound design is based on the perceived over-design of the absorption area
and the additional unnecessary area needed to accommodate mound side-slopes. Evaluation of the
standard mound design shows that the theory of pretreatment has not been applied. Specifically, the
mound rock bed is designed on the development of a clogging mat and is sized at 5 cm/day (50
liters/meter2) in Minnesota. As the effluent passes out of the rock bed and into the sand, the BOD
and TSS levels are substantially reduced, therefore a biological clogging mat should not form at the
absorption area at the sand/natural soil interface. However, the sizing of the absorption area
accounts for the development of a clogging mat. An examination of the literature indicates that the
absorption area for pretreated effluents is similar to what is required for a mound rock bed.
Therefore, in theory, a mound with vertical sidewalls should hydraulically function.
Two types of vertical sidewall mounds were constructed and observed in Minnesota by licensed
professional designers and installers. These vertical side wall mounds are much smaller and have
enhanced aesthetics.
This paper presents the theory behind the vertical sidewall mound, design parameters, construction
methods and observations of performance by licensed professionals in Minnesota.
KEYWORDS: Mounds, Septic Systems, Experimental
Many areas of Minnesota and other parts of the country have soils with limited ability to treat and
dispose of septic tank effluent due to bedrock or seasonally saturated soil. The frequent alternative
of choice in these soil situations is the mound system. The mound system is an elevated system to
achieve the required vertical separation for both treatment and hydraulic performance. In
Minnesota, mound systems first appeared in the state code (Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080) in 1978
as an alternative system and was designated a standard system in 1989. Mound systems are widely
accepted and used in Minnesota.
Both real and perceived shortcomings to standard mound designs are described below:
1. The relatively large footprint area required (restricting their use on small lots).
2. Poor aesthetics and the unusable lawn area resulting from the sharp rise in elevation.
3. The public’s misconception that mounds do not work.
4. The need for a pump and controls.
5. The relatively high cost.
The proposed vertical sidewall mound mitigates problems #1 and #2 and does not exacerbate
problems #3 through #5.
The concept of a vertical side wall mound was presented to approximately 400 licensed professional
designers and installers in Minnesota during training workshops. From this, some designers and
installers developed specific designs for vertical side wall mounds and installed them in areas that
could not support a standard mound system.
This paper reports the theory behind vertical side wall mounds, how vertical side wall mounds have
been designed and used in Minnesota and reports the known performance of systems currently in
use.
* M.S. Wespetal, P.S.S. – Senior Hydrologist, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, St. Paul , MN 55155
MOUND DESIGN
The current design for mound systems in Minnesota is very similar to those recommended by
Converse and Tyler (1990) and that of the Wisconsin Department of Commerce Mound Component
Manual (1998).
The main design parameters for standard mounds in Minnesota include:
Flow amount is 568 L/bedroom/day (150 Gal/bedroom/day).
Minimum native soil requirement is 0.3 m (12”) of natural soil above seasonally
saturated soil or bedrock with a percolation rate faster than 1.2 cm/hr.
Rock bed area is sized at a 5 cm/day loading (50 L/m2) [1.2 Gal/ft2) (based on domestic
quality effluent)
Sand blanket depth required below the rock bed must result in a 0.9 m (36”) vertical
separation, (the vertical separation can include the depth of suitable native soil).
Sand blanket must meet ASTM C-33 specifications.
Rock bed width is based a linear loading rate of 150 L/meter (3.7 Gal/ft) or less.
Upper edge of rock bed must be on the contour.
Pressure distribution is required.
Mound side-slopes must not be steeper than three horizontal units to one vertical unit
and shall extend beyond the required absorption area, if necessary.
Calculating Mound Absorption Area
The absorption area is the area of native soil below the sand blanket required to absorb the
septic tank effluent. It is determined by multiplying the absorption length by the absorption
width. The absorption length is determined by the linear loading rate described by Converse
and Tyler (1984) and Converse and Tyler (1990). The absorption width is determined by
the relationship between the allowable loading rate to the sand blanket (50 L/meter2) versus
the allowable loading rate to the native soil as seen in Column A in Table 1. A ratio of the
allowable loading rate to the sand to the allowable loading rate to the soil is established to
determine the width. For example, if the native soil is a loam the loading rate to a loam is
25 liter/m2. The ratio is determined by dividing 50 L/m2/day by 25 L/m2/day resulting in a
ratio of 2.0 (Column B in Table 1). The rock bed width is multiplied by this ratio to
determine the absorption width (Column C in Table 1). On flat sites the absorption area is
centered under the rock bed (Fig. 1 A.). On sloping sites the rock bed is measured from the
upslope edge of the rock bed and measured in the direction of the original land slope (Fig. 1
B.).
Determining Total Footprint Area
The total footprint area is the total area required for the final dimensions of the mound.
Typically, it is determined by the minimum side-slope requirements of the mound system.
In Minnesota, the minimum side-slope is a ratio of three horizontal units to one vertical unit
(3:1). This has been chosen for ease of maintenance (mowing) and aesthetics. In many
cases mounds are designed with a side-slope ratio of 4:1 for enhanced aesthetics. For flat
and slightly sloping areas, the 3:1 side-slopes extend beyond the needed absorption area for
most situations in Minnesota (Fig. 2). Table 1 column E gives the total footprint area that
includes the upslope width, the side-slope widths and the down slope width. Table 1 clearly
indicates that the 3:1 side-slope requirement is the determining factor for size of the final
footprint for most situations in Minnesota.
The required absorption area adds to the overall footprint on a low mound (0.3 m of sand
below the rockbed due to 0.6 m of suitable native soil) placed on heavier textured soils.
Table 1. Mound Design Factors for Absorption Width and 3:1 Side-slopes.
Column A. Column
B.
Column C. Column D. Column E.
Allowable
loading
rate to the
native soil
(L/m2/day)
Ratio of
rock bed
width to
absorption
width.
Absorption
width based
on 2.4 meter
rock bed
width (m)
Total
absorption
area for a 3-
bedroom
dwelling.
(m2)
Total
footprint for a
3 bedroom
dwelling
based on 3:1
sideslopes.
(m2)
Soil Texture
sand 49 (13 gal) 1.0 2.4 (7.9’) 35 (376) 211
fine sand 24.5 2.0 4.8 70 211
sandy loam 32.6 1.5 3.6 53 211
loam 24.5 2.0 4.8 70 211
silt loam 20.4 2.4 5.8 84 211
clay loam 18.3 2.7 6.5 92 211
A. Flat site:
B. Sloping site:
Figure 1. Absorption width for a flat site (A.) and a sloping site (B.). The native soil texture is a
loam with a allowable loading of 25 L/m2/day.
Figure 2. Plan view comparing the absoption area versus the total footprint based on the 3:1
sideslope requirement. The depicted mound is designed for a three bedroom dwelling with 0.6 m
thick sand blanket, on a 2% slope, with the percolation rate of the natural soil of 7.6 cm/hr (loam).
PRETREATMENT THEORY
It is has been documented that septic tank effluent, with it’s relatively high concentrations of
biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), total suspended solids (TSS) and fats, oils and grease (FOG)
< 1% slope
Total Footprint
Absorption Area
2.4 m
14.3 m
3.4 m
2.4 m
2.4 m
21.1 m
3
1
24m
4.9m
Absorption
width
4.8 m
Rockbed
Native soil (loam)
> 1% slope
3
1
Absorption
width
4.8 m
Rockbed
Native soil (loam)
2.4 m
3.4 m
Rockbed
S
l
o
p
e
2.4 m
10.6 m
creates a clogging mat at the distribution medium/soil surface which significantly reduces
infiltration from the distribution medium (Siegrist, 1987, Siegrist et.al, 1984). Current research
indicates that reducing BOD, TSS and FOG levels with secondary treatment eliminates or
significantly reduces the formation of a clogging mat (Tyler and Converse, 1994). With a reduction
or elimination of the clogging mat, the infiltration rate should significantly increase resulting in a
reduction in the needed absorption area. In a mound system, the clogging mat forms at the
rock/sand interface. The clogging mat and sand blanket “pretreat” the effluent by effectively
removing a large percentage of the BOD, TSS and FOG. The effluent reaching the native soil
surface should have significantly reduced contaminant levels and it could be safely assumed that
little to no clogging mat will form at the sand/soil interface. However, the absorption ratios (Table
1 Column B) to determine the absorption area in mound systems are based on the assumption that a
clogging mat will form at the sand/soil interface. Therefore, in theory, an open bottom vertical
sidewall mound system should hydraulically perform.
It should be noted that adequate treatment is not a concern with the vertical sidewall mound,
because 0.9 m of vertical separation is still employed along with a reasonable loading rate to the
sand.
Box Mound Design Based on Pretreatment Theory
The theory of pretreatment is used in vertical sidewall mound design. It is based on the theory that
clean sand can percolate septic tank effluent at the same rate as the native soil can infiltrate
secondary effluent. This theory holds true even for the slowest infiltration rate soil (clay loam)
allowed to be used for a vertical sidewall mound. The absorption area proposed for vertical
sidewall mounds is greater than recommend by Tyler and Converse (1994) for pretreated effluent
for soil dispersal areas. Please refer to Table 2.
Table 2. Comparisons of absorption areas between standard mounds and vertical sidewall mounds.
The table is based on a vertical sidewall mound with a 2.4 m wide rock bed with an additional 0.3 m
between the rock bed and the wall.
Vertical
sidewall
mound
absorption
area (m2)
Standard mound
absorption area
(m2)
%
reduction
% reduction
recommend
by Tyler and
Converse
(1994)
Soil
Texture
sand 45.5 35 30%
(increase)
94
fine sand 45.5 70 35 72
sandy loam 45.5 53 14 88
loam 45.5 70 35 88
silt loam 45.5 84 46 88
clay loam 45.5 92 51 72
Total Footprint Area Reduction
It can be seen from Table 1 column E that the 3:1 side-slope requirement is the main factor in the
large footprint area for a standard mound. The total footprint area was derived by summing the
upslope area, rockbed width and downslope width and multipling that amount by the sum of the
rockbed length and the side widths (same as upslope dike widths). Below is a comparison of the
total footprint area for a standard mound with a vertical sidewall mound for a 3-bedroom home with
a 2.4 m wide rock bed with an additional 0.3 m between the rock bed and the wall.
Table 3. Comparison of total footprint area of standard mound and box mound.
Standard mound footprint
(m2)
vertical side wall
mound footprint (m2)
Percent
Reduction
211 46 78
VERTICAL SIDEWALL MOUND DESIGN
The vertical sidewall mound design is based on the same design theories and parameters as standard
mound systems as described earlier, except as presented below:
1. The vertical sidewalls of the mound are placed 0.3m outside of the edge and ends of the rock
bed to promote good oxygen transfer into the box and under the bed, to slightly increase the
absorption area which could be helpful on the heavier textured soils, and for insulation in cold
weather.
2. The walls are constructed out of treated dimension lumber, treated timbers, or decorative
concrete blocks (Fig. 3). The walls should be internally supported to avoid future outward
pressures and sagging. As with standard mounds, the system is placed on the contour (Fig. 4.)
3. A 0.07 to 0.14 mm polyetheline liner and 1.9 to 5 cm of insulation are added at the sidewalls to
maintain higher temperatures in the winter months.
4. The rock bed thickness in a standard mound is approximately 31 to 33 cm [12” – 12.2”] (23 cm
below the pipe, pipe thickness, and 5 cm above the pipe) The 23cm below the pipe is for storage
and the 5 cm above the pipe is for protection from crushing. Both of these design parameters
seem to be excessive (1.5 days of storage in the rockbed at design flow). For vertical side wall
mounds it is recommended that only four inches of rock be placed below the pipe. This would
still provide 1135 liters (2/3 of a day at design flow) and 1.3 days at the flow amounts actually
produced by a dwelling. It is further recommended that only 2.5 cm of rock be placed above the
pipe, since no driving on the box mound could crush the pipe. This would reduce the height of
the mound by 18 cm (7 inches).
5. A total of 20 cm (8”) of topsoil, compost or decorative bark is placed over the top of the rock
bed for frost protection and to grow plants if desired. Standard mounds are crowned to promote
runoff, but in vertical side wall mounds are not. Crowning is not required for standard in-
ground systems which appear not to have problems during precipitation events.
A.
B.
Figure 3. Vertical side wall mounds constructed from decorative block (A.) and treated
dimensioned lumber (B).
Figure 4. vertical Sidewall mound placed on a contour.
A graphical depiction of a box mound is provided in fig. 5.
Figure 5. Cross section of a vertical sidewall mound using decorative concrete blocks.
Monitoring and Mitigation
In Minnesota, any non-standard system must have a monitoring and mitigation plan in the event the
system fails. Since the vertical sidewall mound relies on 0.9 m (36”) of passive soil treatment only
hydraulic monitoring is necessary. If the system is found to be weeping, the mitigation method is to
increase the absorption area. This can be accomplished by constructing a much shorter box
adjacent to the main box as seen in Fig. 6.
Figure 6. A mitigation design for toe seepage from a box mound.
Modified Vertical Sidewall Mound
A modified vertical sidewall mound has been designed and installed in about 30 sites in Minnesota.
The modification is to provide pretreatment before the rock bed using a customized aerobic
treatment unit (ATU) to eliminate the formation of the clogging mat at the rock bed/sand interface.
Pretreatment prior to distribution will allow a reduction in the size of the distribution medium. The
distribution medium used in this design is corrugated gravelless leachbed pipe. The impetus for this
Mottled Soil or Bedrock
0.14mm poly and
5 cm insulation
3 m or less
Decorative
concrete blocks
Topsoil or mulch or 8 "
0.9m
0.3 m
Rock bed
Topsoil and/or
compost or
mulch
20 cm
0.3m Minimum
ASTM C-33 Sand
Pressure
distribution
pipes
Native soil
Topsoil or 8
type of design is to accommodate existing dwellings on very small lots whose only alternative was a
holding tank.
The design theory and concept is similar to vertical sidewall mounds receiving septic tank effluent.
The customized ATU has positive filtration and removes some pathogenic organisms. This
pathogen removal along with the sand blanket loaded at 245 l/m2/day or less should remove the
remaining viruses. The thickness of the sand blanket meets the 0.9 m vertical separation distance.
The footprint of the modified vertical sidewall mound is 2.4 m by 6.7 m for all soil conditions. A
sand blanket (ASTM C-33) is used to meet a 0.9 m vertical separation distance. The distribution
medium is two 6.1 m lengths of gravelless leachbed pipe. Newer designs have used only one
gravelless leachbed pipe. The system uses pressure distribution by hanging a small diameter PVC
pipe inside the leachbed pipe. The dosing volume is 76 liters per dose. The leachbed pipe is covered
by compost materials. The modified vertical sidewall mounds built to date do not have a
polyethelene barrier or insulation on the sidewalls. The systems were constructed by first installing
the pressure line to the mound area. Next, the soil is scarified and the walls are constructed from
outside the scarified area. The remaining construction is similar to standard mound construction
practices as described in Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080.
RESULTS
Performance of Vertical Sidewall Mounds
The concept of the vertical sidewall mounds was presented to septic system designers through
training workshops without specifice design parameters. The initial use of such systems left to the
discretion to individual designers and local units of government. Therefore, each system varies
somewhat from the others. Currently three vertical sidewall mounds receive septic tank effluent and
about 30 modified vertical sidewall mounds receive pretreated effluent. The oldest system is less
than two years old. Since this was not a formal research project, no rigorous monitoring regime has
been developed and implemented.
To date none of the vertical sidewall mounds (modified or non-modified) have had toe seepage nor
has freezing occured. Random temperature measurements of some reduced size vertical sidewall
mounds during the winter of 1999/2000 in southern Minnesota indicated mound temperatures of
8.9o C. This winter was unusually mild.
Cost of Vertical Sidewall Mounds
Cost of vertical sidewall mounds is comparable to standard mounds in Minnesota. Much less sand
is required (Table 4), however that cost savings is lost in cost of materials and labor for construction
of the walls.
Table 4. Comparison of sand quantities of standard mound, vertical side wall mound and
modified vertical side wall mound for a 3 bedroom home, 0.61m thick sand blanket, 2.4m
wide rockbed, less than 2 percent slope.
System Type Sand quantity
(cu/yds)
Percent
Reduction
standard mound 70 N/A
vertical side wall mound 29 59
modified vertical side wall
mound
14 80
Vertical sidewall mounds which receive septic tank effluent where built in northern Minnesota and
cost approximately $6,500 in with a standard grassed side-slope mound in that area costing about
$6,300. Modified vertical sidewall mounds which receives pretreated effluent were built in
southern Minnesota and cost approximately $13,000 (which includes the ATU cost). This $13,000
cost also includes customized landscaping costs, a three-year warranty and five years of monitoring
which includes effluent sampling and chemical analysis. This cost compares to $10,000 for a
standard grassed side-slope mound in southern Minnesota, which does not have monitoring and
sampling costs.
CONCLUSIONS
The advantages and disadvantages with vertical sidewall mounds are as follows:
Advantages -
* Vertical side wall mounds are smaller and can fit on small lots with limiting soil
conditions (Table 1.)
* Vertical side wall mounds are more aesthetically pleasing (Figures 3 and 5).
* Vertical side wall mounds saves the use of an additional pump over a buried sand
filter with a pressurized trench system.
* Vertical side wall mounds use much less sand (Table 4).
Disadvantages-
* At this time hydraulic performance has not been proven and the tendency to freeze
is still unknow.
* Vertical side wall mounds take longer to construct (unless long haul distance for
sand).
* Increased material cost for the vertical sidewalls.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author wishes to acknowledge and thank Doug Fessel – Fessel Septic Service, Ed and Brandon
Melzark- Melzark Sewer and Excavation and George Rowell - R & B Septic Systems.
REFERENCES
1. Bouma, J., J.C. Converse, R. J. Otis, W.G. Walker, and W.A. Ziebell. 1975. A mound system
for on-site disposal of septic tank effluent in slowly permeable soils with seasonally perched
water tables. In: J. Environmental Qual. 4. (3):382-388.
2. Converse, J. C. 1978. Design and construction manual for Wisconsin mounds. Small Scale
Waste Management Project, Publication No. 15.5, University of Wisconsin-Madison, WI.
3. Converse, J. C. and E.J. Tyler. 1990. Wisconsin mound soil absorption system siting, design
and construction manual. Small Scale Waste Management Project Publication No. A 15.22
University of Wisconsin – Madison.
4. Converse, J. C. and E.J. Tyler. 1984. Wisconsin mounds for very difficult sites. In: Proceedings
of the Fourth National Symposium of Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems.
American Society of Agricultural Engineers, St. Joseph, MI.
5. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency. 1999. Minnesota Rules Chapter 7080 – Individual
Sewage Treatment Systems. The office of Revisor of Statutes, St.Paul, Minnesota
6. Siegrist, R. L. 1987. Hydraulic loading rates for soil absorption systems base on wastewater
quality. In Proceedings of the Fifth National Symposium on Individual and Small Community
Sewage Systems. American Society of Agriculutral Engineers, St. Joseph MI.
7. Siegrist, R. L., D. L. Anderson, J.C. Converse. 1984. Commerical wastewater on-site treatment
and disposal. In Proceedings of the Fourth National Symposium on Individual and Small
Community Sewage Systems. American Society of Agriculutral Engineers, St. Joseph MI.
8. Tyler, E. J., and J.C. Converse. 1994. Soil Acceptance on Onsite Wastewater as Affected Soil
Morphology and Wastewater Quality. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium
on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems. American Society of Agriculutral
Engineers, St. Joseph MI.
9. Wisconsin Department of Commerce Division of Safety and Buildings. 1998. Mound
component manual for private onsite wastewater treatment systems (draft). Wisconsin
Department of Commerce Division of Safety and Buildings, Madison, WI.
SITE RESEARCH
12050 196th st N, Scandia, MN
Acres 0.24 ZIP4 NULL
Square
Footage 10518 State MN
Parcel ID 2903220140009 Plat Name NULL
Owner
Name
DAVIES
ROBERT J &
DEBRA K
Block NULL
Owner
More NULL Lot NULL
Owner
Address PO BOX 384 Multi Uses N
PO Box Homestead N
City,
State, Zip
FOREST
LAKE MN
55025
Dwell Type Single-Family / Owner Occupied
Estimated
Land
Value
$165,400 Home Style 1 Story Frame
Estimated
Building
Value
$30,600 Finished SqFt 400
Estimated
Total
Value
$196,000 Garage
Sale Date 5/11/2001 Garage SqFt
Sale
Value $93,900 Basement Y
School
District ISD831 Heating FA Gas
Watershed
District
WS
CARNELIAN
MARINE ST
CROIX
Cooling N
Class
Code 1 125 SRR Year Built 1960
Class
Code 2 Number of Units 1
Class
Code 3 Green Acre N
Class
Code 4 Open Space N
Building
Number 12050 Ag Preserve N
City CITY OF
SCANDIA SITUS_ADDRESS 12050 196TH ST N, CITY OF SCANDIA
City
USPS SCANDIA TAXDESCRIPTION
THAT PART OF GOVERNMENT LOT 3, SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP
32, RANGE 20, WASHINGTON COUNTY, MINNESOTA,
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST
SOUTHERLY CORNER OF LOT 9, BLOCK 2, OF THE RECORDED
PLAT OF BECKSTROM ADDITION; THENCE SOUTH 36 DEGREES
17 MINUTES WEST ASSUMING THE SOUTHWEST LINE OF SAID
LOT
ZIP 55073 TAXPIN 29.032.20.14.0009
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for
a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
Map Scale
1 inch = 42 feet
9/14/2020
12050 196th st N, Scandia, MN
September 14, 2020 0 40 8020 ft
0 10 205 m
1:500
Disclaimer: Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate, but accuracy is not guaranteed. This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal, survey, or for zoning verification.
6
Custom Soil Resource Report
Soil Map
500879050088005008810500882050088305008840500885050088605008870500879050088005008810500882050088305008840500885050088605008870510950 510960 510970 510980 510990 511000
510950 510960 510970 510980 510990 511000
45° 13' 59'' N 92° 51' 38'' W45° 13' 59'' N92° 51' 35'' W45° 13' 57'' N
92° 51' 38'' W45° 13' 57'' N
92° 51' 35'' WN
Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 15N WGS84
0 15 30 60 90
Feet
0 5 10 20 30
Meters
Map Scale: 1:400 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet.
Soil Map may not be valid at this scale.
Washington County, Minnesota
159B—Anoka loamy fine sand, 3 to 9 percent slopes
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1t943
Elevation: 670 to 1,450 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 27 to 33 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 46 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 180 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Anoka and similar soils:90 percent
Minor components:10 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Anoka
Setting
Landform:Outwash plains
Landform position (two-dimensional):Backslope
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Outwash
Typical profile
Ap - 0 to 9 inches: loamy fine sand
E/Bt - 9 to 60 inches: loamy fine sand
Properties and qualities
Slope:3 to 9 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Well drained
Capacity of the most limiting layer to transmit water (Ksat):High (1.98 to 5.95
in/hr)
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Available water capacity:Moderate (about 8.0 inches)
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4e
Hydrologic Soil Group: A
Forage suitability group: Sloping Upland, Acid (G090XN006MN)
Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Acid (G090XN006MN)
Hydric soil rating: No
Minor Components
Soderville
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
Custom Soil Resource Report
10
Lino
Percent of map unit:5 percent
Hydric soil rating: No
1033—Udifluvents
Map Unit Setting
National map unit symbol: 1t96x
Elevation: 670 to 1,050 feet
Mean annual precipitation: 27 to 33 inches
Mean annual air temperature: 39 to 46 degrees F
Frost-free period: 135 to 180 days
Farmland classification: Not prime farmland
Map Unit Composition
Udifluvents and similar soils:90 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Description of Udifluvents
Setting
Landform:Shorelines
Down-slope shape:Linear
Across-slope shape:Linear
Parent material:Sandy beach sediments
Properties and qualities
Slope:0 to 6 percent
Depth to restrictive feature:More than 80 inches
Drainage class:Somewhat poorly drained
Depth to water table:More than 80 inches
Frequency of flooding:None
Frequency of ponding:None
Interpretive groups
Land capability classification (irrigated): None specified
Land capability classification (nonirrigated): 4w
Forage suitability group: Sloping Upland, Low AWC, Acid (G090XN008MN)
Other vegetative classification: Sloping Upland, Low AWC, Acid (G090XN008MN)
Hydric soil rating: No
W—Water
Map Unit Composition
Water:100 percent
Estimates are based on observations, descriptions, and transects of the mapunit.
Custom Soil Resource Report
11
Septic Tank Absorption Fields (MN)–Washington County, Minnesota
Map symbol and soil
name
Pct. of
map
unit
Septic Tank Absorption Fields
- At-Grade
Septic Tank Absorption Fields
- Mound
Septic Tank Absorption Fields
- Trench
Rating class and
limiting features
Value Rating class and
limiting features
Value Rating class and
limiting features
Value
159B—Anoka loamy
fine sand, 3 to 9
percent slopes
Anoka 90 Not limited Moderately limited Moderately limited
Slope 0.26 Fine Sands 0.21
1033—Udifluvents
Udifluvents 90 Not rated Not rated Not rated
W—Water
Water 100 Not rated Not rated Not rated
Custom Soil Resource Report
15
12050 196th St N, Marine On Saint Croix, Minnesota, 55047
UTM: 511378 (x), 5008851 (y) Latitude/Longitude: 45.23306 / -92.85504
Township: 32 North, Range: 20 West, Section: 29, City/Township: Scandia MN Department of Health | Minnesota Department of Health, Environmental Health Divisio…
+
–
0 0.5 1mi
Layer Name Layer Label Legend
Wells
Selected Wells
Public Wells
Domestic Wells
Irrigation
Wells
Monitor Wells
Other Wells
Sealed Wells
Unverified
Wells
Township
Range Section
DWSMA
SWBCA
Zoom to see wells, TRS, DWSMA and SWBCA
DWSMA: The area managed by a public water
supplier to protect their source water
SWBCA: Special Well and Boring Construction
Area layer
⇗
Minnesota
Department of
Health
Minnesota Well Index
Search by Zoom to Tools Base Maps Other Links Help
12050 196th St N, Marine On Saint Croix, MN
Version 2.0.62, 07/15/19 1:39PM
UTM: 510957 (x), 5008750 (y) Latitude/Longitude: 45.23216 / -92.86041
Township: 32 North, Range: 20 West, Section: 29, City/Township: Scandia MN Department of Health | Minnesota Geological Survey, University of Minnesota and the …
+
–
0 150 300ft
Layer Name Layer Label Legend
Wells
Selected Wells
Public Wells
Domestic Wells
Irrigation
Wells
Monitor Wells
Other Wells
Sealed Wells
Unverified
Wells
Township
Range Section
DWSMA
SWBCA
Zoom to see wells, TRS, DWSMA and SWBCA
DWSMA: The area managed by a public water
supplier to protect their source water
SWBCA: Special Well and Boring Construction
Area layer
⇗
Minnesota
Department of
Health
Minnesota Well Index
Search by Zoom to Tools Base Maps Other Links Help
12050 196th St N, Marine On Saint Croix, MN
Version 2.0.62, 07/15/19 1:39PM
Well List selected
Highlighted are Field Verified Wells. Click Unique Well ID to see detailed well infomation
Unique Number Well Name Address City County Township Range Section Depth(ft)Elevation(ft)Casing Depth(ft)Casing Diameter
107146 RUSSELL, LLOYD 12070 196TH ST MARINE ON ST CROIX Washington 32 20 29 170 948 147 4
12050 196th St N, Marine On Saint Croix, Minnesota, 55047
UTM: 511150 (x), 5008791 (y) Latitude/Longitude: 45.23253 / -92.85795
Click map to get township, range and section MN Department of Health | Minnesota Geological Survey, University of Minnesota and the …
+
–
0 150 300ft
Layer Name Layer Label Legend
Wells
Selected Wells
Public Wells
Domestic Wells
Irrigation
Wells
Monitor Wells
Other Wells
Sealed Wells
Unverified
Wells
Township
Range Section
DWSMA
SWBCA
Zoom to see wells, TRS, DWSMA and SWBC
DWSMA: The area managed by a public wat
supplier to protect their source water
SWBCA: Special Well and Boring Constructi
Area layer
Minnesota
Department of
Health
Minnesota Well Index
Search by Zoom to Tools Base Maps Other Links Help
12050 196th St N, Marine On Saint Croix, MN
Version 2.0.62, 07/15/19 1:39PM